Dynamic Yet Consistent

First… an apology to all my readers (all 8 of you… 6 if you don’t count Beth and my mom).   On July 14th Beth and I started a series of ten top 10 lists.  We tried to post daily, but unfortunately I have gotten a bit behind.  That has partly been because of craziness in life, but also because I have been a lot of thought in this final list.  So far we have explored the things that we enjoy, the things we want to do, and a few things about us.  If you have followed along closely, you might have learned a bit about what type of person I am.  I believe that underneath these lists are core ideas that define me as a person.

In reflecting on life these last two weeks, I have examined the concepts that drive me as a person.  In my mind, they all are synergistic and guide my day-to-day living as well as the larger direction of my life.  Here are the 10 ideas that define me as person.

1. Trajectory of Redemptive History – I first picked up this phrase in Dr. Sandy Richter’s Intro to Old Testament my first semester at Asbury Seminary.  Since then, it has been the primary way that I understand the work of God, God’s people, and the narrative of scripture.  The idea is simple: Since the beginning of history, God has been working in and through his people to bring all of creation to redemption and restoration.  I do not believe the world is constantly descending into more and more evil and pain, but rather, it is consistently moving to place where all wrongs are set right and life is as it should be.  Martin Luther King Jr. expressed this concept when he said, ” The arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice.”  In regards to this central idea to my life, I must highly recommend Dr. Richter’s book The Epic of Eden.
2. Kingdom of God – During the summer of 2006 Beth and I hosted a Bible Study for college students in our home.  We looked through book of Matthew at all of Jesus’ references to the Kingdom of Heaven (Kingdom of God in other gospels).  Simply put, it completely changed the way I viewed the message of Jesus.  In the 6 months that followed, my entire approach to Christianity began to morph.  This was one of the most formative and painful times in my life.  The concept of the KofG is complex and simple at the same time.  It is in essence the world where God gets his way — it is a world redeemed and restored.  I am convinced Christians are a part of the KofG and called to bring it about.  There is a constant tension between the “already” and the “not yet” of this idea.  A good intro to this concept is N.T. Wright’s The Challenge of Jesus.
3. Nature of Truth – During my time of theological and philosophical transition (which, while coinciding with my entry into Seminary, was probably more of a push back to what I was learning than the result of it) one of the primary things I gave thought to was the nature of truth and how we know what we know.  I have written an extensive piece on my conclusions (this blog is actually titled after this paper).  To summarize, I believe there is truth, but it can only be understood through our flawed human existence.  Our worldview will always skew our perception.  This has led me to be more humble in how I understand knowledge and open to others conclusions.
4. Interpretive Communities – If truth is dynamic (or at least flexible in our understanding of it) how do we reach conclusions on what is?  Stanley Fish has given me the framework for answering this question.  Truth is shaped by the communities we are a part of.  I have discussed the practicalities of this in this post.
5. You must be the change you wish to see in the world – This quote is from Ghandi and is pretty self explanatory.  I tend to be fairly cerebral and will process thoughts on societal change in my mind quite frequently.  I constantly ask ‘What does it look like to have the Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven.”  Sometimes I think I have the answer, other times I am overwhelmed.  But consistently, I must be reminded that knowing change is needed is useless if nothing is being done to bring it about.  I have spent way too much time trying to convince others to change, when in reality, I must first embody the change I wish to see.
6. Pacifism – I have increasingly found as I explore the implications of Kingdom theology that if I want to truely follow Jesus, it requires radical pacifism.  This is one area where I feel my Mennonite brothers and sisters have a lot to teach mainstream evangelicals.  This is a topic I wish to explore further in the coming weeks.  Look for a full length post (or 3), but until then, I urge you to ponder the implications of this quote from MLK:
   
   Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal.
   
   
7. Knowledge is power – This sounds odd to me when I list it out, but the essence of this idea play out regularly in my life.  This does not mean the more degrees you get the more influence you have, or that the most powerful people are the most learned.  Instead, it refers to ability.  If I have knowledge of how to fix a lawn mower, I can help my neighbor out in a pinch.  If I can speak another language, I can learn more about a person and their situation.  If I understand a person’s situation, I can empathize and appreciate them more.  Unfortunately, the withholding of knowledge can be used to oppress and subjugate.  That is why I find great power in open and non traditional learning.
8. Stewardship of Creation – Because of the way I view the world and the Kingdom of God, I hold firm to the belief that all people are called to participate in the protection and redemption of the world.  While this included environmental responsibility, it also points to the belief that all people are part of a larger world and the needs of all must be considered.
9. Umbuntu – This is an African concept that can loosely be translated “I am because we are.”  It focuses on the interconnectedness of all people and the need for mutual respect.  It also captures the way community identity shapes personal identity.  It is the antithesis of individualism.  In the past few decades, many of the leaders I most respect have used this idea to being about peaceful reconcilliation.  Here is a clip of Desmond Tutu discussing the concept of Ubuntu:
   httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftjdDOfTzbk
10. Prophetic Imagination – In his book The Prophetic Imagination, Walter Brueggemann discusses the role of the prophet in brining about a better world.  He claims a prophet must be able to project a world as is it can be so we can see past the world as it is.  In doing this, he identifies two modes: criticizing and energizing.  Basically he says at times a prophet must speak out against injustices, and at other times a prophet must speak about things that can happen.  However, at the end of the day, the prophet must embody this alternate reality.  This tension between criticizing and energizing is put plainly by Ben Harper when he asks, “what good is a critic with no better plan.”  In fact, his whole song “Better Way” exemplifies this concept.
    httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TILzJ-_4urk

Closing note:

As I upload this final post in the my series of ten Top 10 lists, I just wanted to say how much I have enjoyed writing them and have been encouraged by the response I have received.  I am very thankful Beth decided to join me in writing out her lists.  It was a great experiance to work through this process of self-reflection together.  If you have not read her posts and are interested in them, you can view them here on her blog: A Sugar-Mamma’s Thoughts

Beth and I have taken a short break from our 10 top 10 lists in order to spend some time with family.  Today we are on list #6, which looks at the most influential books for us.  Many of the concepts raised in these books will be revisited with our final blog post, which will examine the 10 ideas that define us as people.  I have listed them in a way that illustrates how each builds on the others.

1. Is there a text in this class?, Stanley Fish – This book examines the nature of truth as it relates to the authority of texts.  As you will see, many of the books that follow rely on an interpretation of scripture to direct a community to action.  Fish provides a framework for understanding how interpretive communities shape truth.
   
2. Nature of Doctrine, George Lindbeck – Whereas Fish looks as the authority of texts, Lindbeck looks at the nature of religion to determine how they practically function.  It is his conclusion that religion is like language and culture in that it explains the world around us, but it also helps us experience it.
   
3. Life in Biblical Israel, Philip King and Lawrence Stager – Once we have discussed the role of community, religions and texts, it is essentially we understand the communities of Scripture if we are going to allow it to shape our lives.  This book is approachable and practical as it outlines the world from which the Old Testament was born.  Concepts such as kinsman redeemer and house of the father unlock amazing depth in the Hebrew Scriptures.
   
4. New Testament and the People of God, N.T. Wright – No other theologian / historian has shaped my understanding of Scripture more than N.T. Wright.  He does an excellent job of allowing the historical setting to inform a reader’s understanding of Scripture.  He is a prolific writer, but this book in particular has been instrumental in shaping my understanding of the world of the New Testament.
   
   
5. Prophetic Imagination, Walter Brueggemann – Once the world of scripture is established, we must understand how that affects the modern people of God.  Brueggemann (my favorite OT scholar) outlines the role of the prophet in projecting a world in line with God’s will.  Sometimes it requires critisizing an existing establishment, and at other times it requires energizing a new possibility.  I always try to keep both of these sides in tension in my own life.
   
6. Challenge of Jesus, N.T. Wright – Whereas Brueggemann outlines the implications of the OT prophet, in this book Wright outlines the implications of the person of Jesus.  By showing Jesus in his historical context he allows the reader to grasp the importance of the Messiah beyond simply “personal salvation.”
   
   
7. Resident Aliens, Stanley Hauerwas – After understanding the role community plays in shaping an understanding of truth, and then exploring the implications of the communities of scripture, Hauerwas explores what it means for Christians today to live as a community wherein we are in the world but not a part of it — living in a colony of hope.
   
   
8. The Politics of Jesus, John Howard Yoder – I have already confessed that deep down I am a Mennonite.  I have the utmost respect for people who are consistent in their views of the world, and practical in their faith.  This book captures Yoder’s approach to understanding Christianity by outlining a way of life that the modern people of God can follow that is consistent with the person of Jesus.
   
   
9. Imitation of Christ, Thomas à Kempis – Moving away abstract and into the practical aspect of being a Christian, I most often turn to the tested words of Thomas à Kempis.  This is one of the most read texts of all time.  Since we are talking about books today, I will include this quote from him: “At the Day of Judgment, we shall not be asked what we have read, but what we have done.”
   
   
10. Walden, Henry David Thoreau – I end with the timeless work of Henry David Thoreau.  While his existentialist thought may seem out of line in light of the previous 9 pieces, for me it is the culmination of the list because in the pages of this book I have always found the honesty and connectedness to the world that is necessary to live daily.  It was Thoreau who said “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation,” and it is he who provides the most poignant commentary on my life as I flip through the pages of his works.
    

Today Beth and I look to the future with our list of 10 things we want to do before we die.  Some items on this list represent things we already have in the works.  Other items represent things we simply need to make happen.  Finally, a few things on this list are so far out there, I have no idea how to make them happen, but by listing them, hopefully I will move that direction.

1. Live overseas – Beth and I are very serious about spending a significant amount time in a place where our worldview is forced to expand, and where life is redefined.  Furthermore, we want to make sure Mikayla is a part of this experience.  You can read more about our plans to move to Swaziland in the next few years here, here and here.
2. Know everything about something and something about everything – This is taken from a quote by Thomas H. Huxley, but does a great job at summing up my educational goals.  I do foresee a time when I pursue a Ph.D., but even if I don’t, I want to be intentional about knowing enough about one subject that I can be a resource to others.  Likewise, I want to know a little about everything so that my perspective of the world is more rounded, and so I can share in the appreciation others have for their passions.  (I love talking with people about what they do for a living — especially if they are really excited about their job).
3. Adopt a child – Beth and I have been committed to adopting a child since our first conversations about our future plans.  It just makes sense — with so many children without families, why wouldn’t we bring on of them into our home.  Plus, Mikayla is so perfect (healthy, content, good looking), I think we could only go downhill.  I am even ready to get fixed.  Chances are we will adopt while overseas.
4. Get my pilot’s license – This has been a goal of mine for quite a while.  There is a good chance I will begin training in the next 6 months.  While it is expensive, when you compare it to other educational costs, it is no more than a semester of graduate classes.
5. Live off the grid – There are two reason behind this.  1.) I want to be a better steward of creation.  2.) I want to live more simply.  There is a good chance this will occur while we are in Swaziland, but if it doesn’t, I want to make sure it happens when we get back.
6. Speak at least one other language fluently – So far I have ancient Greek and Hebrew under my belt from my days at Asbury.  But being able to ready 2,000 year old texts doesn’t do you much good when you want to communicate with someone today.  Right now Beth and I are beginning to work on our siSwati so we can speak the second national language of Swaziland.  It might not be the most practical language (only 1M in the world speak it), but it will certainly help us with our time overseas.  Once we are back, I may work on my Spanish.
7. Watch a space shuttle launch – Not as profound as some of the other items on my list, but ever since my 5th grade class did a whole unit on space and learned about the whole launch process, I have been fascinated.  I think it would be awesome to see a launch live — especially a night launch.
8. Visit all 7 continents – I have 2 down and will get a 3rd shortly.  Antarctica will be tough, but if I get the other 6, I am pretty sure I could make it happen.  I actually have several friends who work there during the southern summer.
9. Complete an epic backpacking trip – I doubt I will ever complete the AT, the CDT, or the PCT, but I want to do something major.  Maybe it won’t even be stateside.  I want to experience the thrill of completion along with the time to reexamine life that comes with such a trip.
   

   Grave Peak sunset. July 4, 2001

10. Celebrate my 50th anniversary, walk my daughter down the aisle, die content – How is that for a final goal?  I list these last and together because these require a lifetime of dedication.  I want to be happy with my life when it is through and be able to say I have been a good husband a good father.

Honorable Mention: Camp overnight in an interstate medium – Here is the place I have my eye on… easy access, wide area, cover of trees.  Anyone up for it?

As Beth and I list out our top 10 lists of 10, we come to the discussion of food with day 3.  Here is a list of my favorite dishes.  Beyond #1, there is no particular order.

1. Mom’s Vegetable Soup – Far and away my favorite dish.  When I got married, I made sure my wife added this delectable delight to her stable of regular meals.  Thick and healthy, this slightly spicy soup heats up well and can be eaten for 5-10 meals straight with no complaints!!
2. Lettuce Wraps – Perhaps the famous dish from the classy Chinese chain P.F. Chang’s.  I could eat these alone and be very happy.  We have tried to copy the recipe at home.  Our dish is good, but not the same.
3. Thai Food – I know that is a broad category, but I love the mix of sweetness and spiciness with lots of noodles/rice and fresh vegetables.  Thai food can be bold, light and filling all at the same time.  Two favorites are Pad Kee Mao (Drunken Noodles) and a Green Curry / Coconut milk soup served over rice from our local Thai Restaurant.
4. Sushi – I would consider myself a moderate sushi eater.  I don’t shy away from the raw fish dishes, but at the same time I prefer the rolls with tempura.  My favorite is the Special Roll from Ichiban which is fried shrimp, cream cheese, avocado served with spicy crab on top and special sauces below.
5. Chicken Fajita Gyros – Available at a small shotgun style restaurant just off the square of Bowling Green.  Great mix of flavors on delicious pita bread.  You must have it along with the pita and hummus appetizer.
6. Stuffed Jalapenos – Beth has a recipe that she makes that uses fresh jalapenos (straight from our garden), cuts them in half, and bakes them with a cream cheese and sausage filling.
7. Pizza – But not just any Pizza.  I am talking about a hand tossed masterpiece with thin(ner) crust in the middle and a nice soft crust on the outside edge.  Not too much cheese or sauce, and topped with ham, banana peppers, garlic and onions.  Throw some peppery spices on there and you are good to go.  Honorable mention goes to a good chicken white sauce pizza with lots of garlic.
8. Stew – I love a good thick stew, especially on a cold day.  Lots of bay leaves for flavor along with crushed black peppers, big chunks of potatoes and an abundance of meat makes for a great dish.
9. Mongolian BBQ – I was first introduced to this at a restaurant in Missoula, MT.  Usually it consists of thin slices of meat, noodles, veggies, and your choice of sauces.  You mix it up and then hand it off to have it cooked in front of you.  To make it even better, it usually is all you can eat.
10. Candy – Come on… if you know me, you know my favorite food of all time is candy.  I will eat it all, but I love chewy sweet and sour stuff.  Give me some chewy sweet-tarts, or sour patch kids, or sour watermelon slices and I am golden.  But… don’t leave it laying around if you ever expect to save some for yourself.

We continue with day 2 of our 10 lists on 10 days.  Today, Beth and I have listed the 10 people we would most like to sit and have coffee with.  Of course the consumption of coffee is optional — surely it would make more sense to share a beer with a few of these folks, and others, I would rather talk with as we hiked through nature.  As always, these are in no particular order.

1. Martin Luther King Jr. — Surely no surprise here.  After all, my daughter Mikayla Lillian is named after this civil rights leader.  King is best known for his role in fighting for equal rights for minorities.  However, he was also a passionate pacifist.  He was as opposed to the Vietnam War as he was Jim Crow laws.  I would want to share a drink with him to ask him what issues he saw as most pressing?  Would he concentration on gay rights?  Would he address war and torture?  Would he shift his attention to international issues?For me, MLK embodies the concept of the prophetic imagination (a concept we will explore in a later list).  I still cannot hear his I Have a Dream speech without tearing up.
2. Desmond Tutu – Since we are talking about baby names, I must mention Desmond Tutu.  If our firstborn had been a male, I was advocating for the name Desmond.  Originally we were going to go with Douglas (my middle name), but I realized I would prefer my child to emulate him than me.  Tutu was instrumental in ending apartheid and symbolizes for me how a pastor can lead social change in the name of Christ.  His work on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is awe-inspiring.  I want to know from him, how we can apply these concepts to our daily societal fissures.
3. Bono – I wouldn’t have a string of questions for the lead singer of U2 like I would with many of the others, but in terms of having a good time, hanging out, discussing the ebbs and flows of life, I would think Bono would be the man.  Plus, his lyrics are so deep and harmonize the secular and the sacred.
4. Peter Abelard – Perhaps the most obscure on my list.  Abelard was a tormented theologians in the 12th century (read about him here).  Theologically he is best known for going toe to toe with Anselm over atonement theory.  Abelard advocated for a Moral influence understanding over a substitutionary understanding.  He was quite eccentric and misunderstood.  Here is a paper I have written on him.
5. Henry David Thoreau – I love his unfiltered commentary on life and society.  In addition to his emphasis on self reflection and the awe of creation, he is always honest with his understanding of faith.  I also have been influenced by his thoughts on civil disobedience.
6. Stephen Hawkins – I have been fascinated by theoretical physics since I was in Middle School.  It is only a short jump from physics to philosophy and then to theology.  Hawkins not only provides an entryway into this crazy world, but the way he has approached life’s struggles epitomizes focus and direction.  As you will see in susequent posts, I am convinced quantum physics provides insights into truth.  Here is an approachable clip that will force you to reexamine your understanding of the world.  (Not Hawkins, but he works in the same areas.)
7. John Howard Yoder – deep down I am a Mennonite, I just have not admitted it yet (well except to Brett).  I have learned more from other theologians, but I have yet to find a person who such consistency in their life, faith, theology and philosophy.  Politics of Jesus should be required reading for… well… everyone.
8. N.T. Wright – There is not a simple person who has been more influencial in shaping my theology and understanding of the world and scripture than Bishop N.T. Wright.  I have listened to so many of his lectures I can hear him speak when I read his books.  I find so many of the concepts I regularly explain and rely on come from Wright.  I doubt I could keep up with him, but I would love to drink from the fire hydrant of his knowledge.  Plus, he has a that super cool British accent.  Here is a great resource for other lovers of his work.
9. The Tank Man – Bravery is not something that is planned.  It is not something that is sought out.  It is something that occurs when we stand up for what is just.  I am fascinated by the story of the Tank Man – the young man who stopped a whole line of Chinese tanks through a simply act of resistence.  There are a couple reason he makes my list.  First… I want to know who this person is (to this day, it unknown).  But more importantly, I am drawn to this person because they were able to change the world with simple acts without demanding fame or recognition.
   
10. Jesus – rounding out my list is the God-Man Jesus Christ himself.  I almost didn’t list Jesus.  That is not because I don’t think it would make for excellent conversation, or because I don’t have the ultimate respect, love, and devotion to Jesus.  Rather, it is because I realize I am way too like Peter (see below) and rather than sitting down with a whole list of questions, I would love simply follow Jesus as he navigated the world today.
    

This is the third post in a series on the decision Beth and I have made concerning a long-term move to Africa.  In the first post I detailed how the process started and in the second post I walked through the specifics of the nation we are strongly considering: Swaziland.  This post will cover the whys and whats.

Most people are considerate enough to assume we have a reason for going there, so the most frequent question has been “What will you do there?”  In fact, in one conversation I had with an Embassy employee, I was told after explaining our plans that “No one just comes to Swaziland.”  Well, we are hoping that is hyperbole.

The most honest answer to the question of what will we do is quite simply “we don’t know yet.”  It isn’t that we are planning on moving our family 9000 miles away with no plan, but instead, we don’t want to rush our decisions.  We don’t want to align with an organization without first knowing the impact (positive or negative) they are having.  We don’t want to commit to helping with AIDS victims if we would be better suited to work in the educational system.  We don’t want to live in Manzini if we would be a better fit in the eastern plains.  (you get the picture).  So right now we are being very intention about our research.  We are getting to know the groups currently there, and what opportunities may be there for us.  We are speaking with both Americans and Swazi citizens about the needs and resources.  We are investigating job opportunities in the public, private, government and non-governmental sectors.  We are looking at faith-based and secular openings.  Here are a few things we may consider:

• I may apply for work at the University of Swaziland teaching Theology and Religion at the University of Swaziland.
• Beth may try to work in the Ministry of Education to put her special education training to work.
• We both may work in an orphanage working with orphaned and vulnerable children (OVC).
• We may work with an NGO doing AIDS prevention and education.
• I may work in the private sector doing web development while Beth volunteers in the community.
• We may join the Peace Corp.
• We may work as “missionaries” with any number of faith based groups in the country.
• We may figure out these are not the opportunities / needs of the country and do something like sugar cane harvesting… who knows!

I realize that does not answer the “what” question, but I hope you understand our motives.  I fear too many people decide what needs to be done without ever stepping foot in the country or assessing the impact of their decisions.  That is why we are planning a trip there next summer to serve as the capstone of our state-side research.

Now, let me comment a bit on the why of our decision.  The most straight-forward answer is this: we want to experience life outside the United States in a setting that forces us to reexamine our lives.  (so yes, you could say our motivation is primarily selfish).  Despite the fact Beth and I have spent the last 2-3 years trying to simplify our lives and work towards making the world a better place, it is so easy to get caught in the rat race of life and forget there are things larger than us.  As Rob Bell as put it, “one of the greatest dangers of life is assuming our world is the world!”  Put another way, it is easy to get caught up in things that don’t matter when most of the world is struggling to survive.  (Let us not forget every day 30,000 children die of hunger of preventable diseases, while Americans alone throw away 25% of our edible food.)

I was reminded of this tonight while watching Schindler’s list.  At the end of the movie, after the war has ended and the Jews have been freed, everyone there is greatful for the fact that Schindler has saved over 1,000 Jews and he can only weep and wonder about how much more he could have done.  He breaks down when he realizes the gold pin he is wearing could have been used to save one additional life, or his car could have saved 10 more.  He says “why did I keep the car…”

Here is the clip:

We have realized that the questions we ask, and the issues we care about are directly related to our surroundings.  Our goal is not to go somewhere to “fix” things, but rather to be in a place where we are concerned with the things of more significance than what we eat or what we will wear.

The experiencing of living in a country life Swaziland is more than just something Beth and I want to go through.  We want Mikayla’s formative years to occur in a society where the day to day struggles are litterally a matter of life and death, yet where community is something much deeper than who you hang out with when you are not holed up in a comfy suburban home with 1000 channels, a maid and a wardrobe of clothes you never where because they are out of style.

Will it be tough?  I am sure it will be.  Will we miss our friends and family?  Absolutely?  Will we regret it, or encounter problems beyond what we expected? Perhaps.  But, do we feel this is something we must do?  Without doubt.

As for a finish… we are looking at returning in 2019 or 2020.  That would be the year Mikayla would start Middle school. Our rationale is this: we want her to get the best education possible so she can do whatever she wants with her life.  At the same time, we want to return to the US, because we feel this nation has the resources — both financial and individual — to change the course of the world.

As you can tell, we still have a lot to figure out, but I am excited about the direction we are heading.

To wrap things up, I want to give you a few blog links of people who are in Swaziland:

• A Hipster’s Adventures in Swaziland – a researcher on the Swazi judicial system – he does a good job at commenting on the “real world” in Swaziland.
• Mfomfo’s Blog– regular commentary on the shortcomings of the Swazi government.
• Swazi Secrets – Blog – Entrepreneurs who are trying to make a living selling nuts and oils
• Scott in Swaziland – Medical worker
• David in Swaziland – Another medical worker
• Hard Corps – Swaziland– Peace Corp Worker addressing AIDS issues
• Straight from Swaziland – Christian missionary
• Cabrini Ministries in Swaziland – Roman Catholic Mission in Swaziland

See Also:

Kingdom of Swaziland Part I – Decision to Move

Kingdom of Swaziland Part II – Background on the country

Mikayla showing off her tats

If Mikayla only had a father, these “tattoos” would have been done in sharpie; but since she has a rational mother as well, photoshop will suffice.

Now, before you bash me as a bad father who is projecting negative images on innocent Mikayla, let me explain my thoughts behind this image and then perhaps I can redeem myself.

You see, Mikayla will sometimes “box” with her little hands and punch at the air.  Occasionally she will pause with her clenched fists extended.  This reminded me of the knuckle tattoos that my white, middle-class, suburban friends would draw in middle school as they mimicked what they thought were signs of street life (which the knew nothing about).  My simple mind found humor (crude as it may be) in the juxtaposition between innocence and raw street life.  (Just so you know, I am not the only one who thinks this way. See here, here and here.)

The phrase “Thug Life” started with Tupac Shakur, a New York rapper who was killed in the mid-nineties.  It is often assumed that Thug Life refers gang activity, drugs and crime; however this was never the image that Tupac intended.  Urban Dictionary defines it as such:

Thug life is when you have nothing, and succeed, when you have overcome all obstacles to reach your aim.

If you dig deeper into the phrase, you will actually find it is quite appropriate to consider it along side the image of a newborn as it is supposedly based on an acronym for “The Hate U Give Little Infants F#@&s Everyone.”  Another Urban Dictionary definition explains this concepts by saying:

T.H.U.G.  L.I.F.E.  stands for all the socially oppressive things we are taught at a young age that negatively affects us (or society) as adults.

The focus then is on the environments that breed hate, distrust, corruption and pain.  Thug Life is about overcoming your environment and breaking the cycle in order to achieve your dreams.

Now back to Mikayla’s tats.  The irony is deeper that simply an infant with tattoos commonly seen on the streets.  The irony is that Mikayla will probably never experience the pain and struggles that led Tupac to conceive of the idea of the Thug Life.  Mikayla has a life ahead of her with two parents that love her dearly and are willing to sacrifice immensely for her success.  She will grow up (most of her life) in the richest country in the world and be given the opportunity to attain the best education possible.  She will be given cultural opportunities that expand her horizons and challenge her worldview.  She will be raised by open minded parents who seek a just world with diversity and tolerance.

Mikayla will never have to come home to an empty house as an elementary student, or see her parents shoot up, or need to know that you need to duck when you hear gun shots.  She will not be forced to move every 3 months to avoid paying rent, or be shuffled in foster care.  She will never have to worry about where her next meal will come from, or where she will sleep.  On the international stage, Mikayla will never have to fear being abducted and forced to be a child solider, or of dying of preventable diseases.  She will never have to rely on the UN to take care of her along with millions others in a refuge camp.

Mikayla will never experience the Thug Life.

But even that has been a painful truth for me to grapple with.  Why is our daughter so special?  What has she done to deserve it?  While I would argue I have a very special daughter, the truth is her advantages come simply because she was born to us.  There is nothing she did to earn it.  At the same time, those that are not so lucky are just as innocent as Mikayla.  They don’t deserve the pain and suffering they will go through.

Realizing my love for my daughter has caused me to hurt so much more for those who do not experience this same love.  It has awaken me afresh to the injustices of this world and caused me to lament deeply the suffering of the innocent.  In fact, is has brought me to tears.

These thoughts have been plaguing me for some time.  The second week of Mikayla’s life I wrote this:

My love for my daughter causes me to hurt even deeper for the unloved. Love brings about pain; how do we ensure the opposite is true as well.

I am not hopeful I will ever figure it out, but it is not my desire to no longer feel the pain of this tension.  Instead, I want to be constantly reminded of the blessings I have been given and extend to Mikayla and likewise discontent with the unearned and undeserved pain and tragedy others inherent.  May the pain injustice bring about healing, peace and love.  May the day come when no one experiences the Thug Life.

*Just so you know, I really would not have put sharpie tattoos on my 2 month old daughter… but I did think about it 😉

It has been a long time since something has really gotten my blood boiling, but at 1:00 in the morning while I waiting on videos to render I came across this video.

Let me give a disclaimer first.  I have always approached Mark Driscoll with some hesitancy.  Most of the time I don’t disagree with what he is saying, but I do question his delivery.  To put it simply, I tend to put the emphasis different things.

That being said, this commentary on gender roles is completely out of line and personally offensive.  In case you don’t know, I am currently a stay-at-home dad and this was a decision Beth and I did not take lightly, but are completely happy and at peace with the decision.

Okay, enough with the disclaimers — on to the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WPVxndUcHQ

Lets start with delivery before we dive into the deeper points.  I am convinced Mark thinks he is a better pastor if he drives people out of his church.  He seems to take an arrogant pleasure in the fact that some of the stuff he is saying will piss people off and cause them to leave (by the way… this seems to be par for the course.)  I am sure he would say he is sticking to his guns in the face of a fickle society.  Don’t get me wrong, Christians need to be unwavering on some issues and refuse to compromise.  However, even on issues that stand at the core of Christian belief, there is no need to enter the conversation by speaking down to those who hold opposing views.  There is no room for discussion or clarification.  For Driscoll, this is how it is and everyone else can go to hell.  It is one thing if he takes this attitude on things like the divinity of Christ, but he is talking about stay-at-home dads here.  If I remember correctly (and I too have read the whole Bible) there is no definitive passage addressing the evils of stay-at-home dadding, so we are all forced to interpret secondarily what the witness of scripture is.

Continuing with my critique of Driscoll’s tone, I must call him out for on some of the offensive things he said (and implies).  First, I think it is clear that Driscoll thinks all stay-at-home dads are deadbeats.  Forget his theological rational, his argument revolves around an assumption that it is not manly to stay at home.  Furthermore, he basically says that men suck at nurturing.  That may be the case for him, as he clearly admits, but lets not paint with too broad of a brush.  His statements about men not being cut out for the job of staying at home relies on stereotypes, is short-sighted and is offensive to those who do a great job (may I point to my man Lee Fowlkes.)  Furthermore, he builds his case on the assumption that women cannot adequately provide.  These comments are not based on biblical exegesis, but on ignorance.  If he wanted to make statements about the topic from a (conservative) biblical viewpoint he could have said something like “The bible outlines certain roles each gender should follow.  To deviate from those is a sin.”  Saying that would have been more biblically based without conveying arrogance, ignorance or hate.  The bible does not give him the right to judge the effectiveness of males parenting/nurturing skills.

Now, on to his arguments.  Driscoll bases most of his discussion his interpretation of 1 Timothy 5:8

If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

He has taken the phrase “does not provide for his relatives” to mean the “a man should be the breadwinner.”  But be careful here and go back and read the verse.  Is it addressed to men?  No!  The verse says “anyone” who does not provide for his relatives… So a wife not providing is as bad as a husband.  This is bolstered when you realize this whole segment of 1 Timothy is addressing how to care for widows.  Paul addresses gender roles, but he doesn’t do it here.  Even if you take traditional approach to Christian gender roles and insist on the male being the head of the household, you must admit scripture does not say the man must bring home the bacon.

Since Driscoll is a man who values “The Word” lets take a look at the word.  In 1 Timothy the word for provide is pronoeo and has nothing to do with providing physically.  Instead, it implies thinking ahead (pro=before) and planning.  It is used 3 times in the NT and tends to carry an administrative nuance.  So even if this did apply to directly and only to men (which it doesn’t), a first year seminary student could tell you the exegesis doesn’t allow for a reading that points primarily to providing physically. Driscoll says “if you are an able bodied man it is your job to provide for the needs of your family” and then he goes on to talk about work and material provision.  Where is he getting this, because he sure didn’t get it out 1 Timothy. He is clearly reading what he wants to into the text.  Even if we throw the greek (and context) out, we must admit that “providing for a family” is a multi-faceted thing.  A father could provide all the money in the world, but if he is not taking his turn changing diapers, he is worse than an unbeliever (sarcasm intended). If anything, American fathers need to know that God calls them to provide holistically for their families.  The last thing we need is more distant fathers.

“If our father is our basis for God, and our fathers abandoned us, then what does that tell you about God?” – Tyler Durden in Fight Club

Okay… lets look a bit deeper at how he chooses to answer the question.  The question was “What are your thoughts on stay-at-home dads if the mother really wants / needs to work.”  His answer reveals his convictions on gender roles.  Not only does he speak out against men staying home while women work, he makes it clear he believes a woman’s place is at home.

Personally, if a woman wants that, I think its a great option.  BUT… it is not the only option.  Again, even if you go into a discussion of gender roles, we have to understand what scripture says and doesn’t say.  It clearly does not say a woman should stay at home with the kids.    Driscoll bashes the “culturally relevant” argument, but in doing so he neglects the social situation of the day.  Thank God we have come a long way as a society and women now have choices and are not considered property.  Lets not adopt an archaic social structure (i.e. slavery) just because scripture addresses that cultural circumstance.  But again, that is not even relevant because scripture is silent on whether women should stay at home.  But I digress… I want to return to affirm women who choose to stay at home.  I think this is a much better option than paying someone else to raise your children.  Likewise, if women do work, I think that is a perfectly fine model as well — as long as your family is being cared for.

Lets return to Driscoll’s argument and something his wife says: “”It is hard to respect a man who does not provide…we need to take the word seriously.”  While I agree it would be hard to respect a man who does not care for his family, lets not forget “the word” does not use this phrase to address material, but actually care and foresight.  She then quotes Titus and Paul’s words to this young missionary.  Again, if we look at the context, Paul is giving some suggestions on what to teach to a new church.  There is one phrase in chapter 2 that says “women should be busy at home.”  Now… is there enough in those 6 words to base your entire post-marriage career path on?  I think not.  Can a woman (or man) be busy at home and have a job.  Absolutely.  Just ask my wife!

Lets end on a Driscolls closing.  He says there is nothing in scripture that allows for this sort of family structure.  First, I would also point out there is nothing in scripture that clearly lays out the structure he insists on (mother at home, dad bringing home the bacon).  But more importantly, I would disagree with him.  We do have a model of this.  Check out Lydia in Acts 16:

Lydia’s Conversion in Philippi

¹¹From Troas we put out to sea and sailed straight for Samothrace, and the next day on to Neapolis. ¹²From there we traveled to Philippi, a Roman colony and the leading city of that district of Macedonia. And we stayed there several days.

¹³On the Sabbath we went outside the city gate to the river, where we expected to find a place of prayer. We sat down and began to speak to the women who had gathered there. ¹⁴One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message. ¹⁵When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home. “If you consider me a believer in the Lord,” she said, “come and stay at my house.” And she persuaded us.

…

⁴⁰After Paul and Silas came out of the prison, they went to Lydia’s house, where they met with the brothers and encouraged them. Then they left.

The text clearly shows a woman working outside the house.  The household is identified by her name rather than her husband’s and she is in a prestigious business.  I will grant a couple points: She was not a christian when described as working, it is possible her husband is dead / she is not married.  However, what I find important here is that the text is neutral and does not paint Lydia’s work outside the home as a bad thing.

Lets get personal for a second.  Beth and made the decision together for me to be a stay-at-home dad.  We realized that we could provide for our family best if she worked and I stayed home.  We are not giving into cultural trends, we are biblically asking how we can best provide and following through.  Let me say this too.  Beth is not working just so she can make the money to sustain the family.  She is working because the job she has allowed for more ministry than anything I could get.  Plus, it freed me up to engage in ministry of my own that I would not be able to do if I was working full time.  Forget killing two birds with one stone, we just took out a flock of geese with a boulder: Beth can minister as a teacher, I can minister during the day, Mikayla is raised primarily by her parents, financially we can give more to charity and the church…. and the list goes on.

Driscoll’s conclusion to the question asked is very direct: unless there are extreme circumstances, it is outside God’s will for a man to be a stay-at-home dad.  He even goes as far as saying such an action would require church discipline.  Once again, I must ask… on what grounds?  It is so frustrating to hear his pastor rail so heavily on the importance of the scripture, yet when you take even cursory glance at his arguments you realize his preconceived views are more heavily at play than the authority of scripture.  We aren’t even discussing interpretation of difficult passages.  Driscoll is ignoring the context and running with a flawed ideal.

This is not just about me getting my feelings hurt.  This man is calling into question the career and family life of a significant number of godly people.  Heaven forbid godly men and women abandon their life just because some pastor misreads (or ignores) the implications of Scripture.  If Beth and I were to act on his advice and take up his model for a godly family, we would be living on less, giving less, Mikayla would have less time with her parents, Beth would leave a job she loves and I would have to take a job I hate, our opportunities for ministry would decrease and our stress would increase.  Is that really the biblical ideal of providing for one’s family.  I think not.

I would leave his church over statements like this (and perhaps that would only stoke his ego) because I think they are dangerous and ignorant.

Beth and I are not ignoring the call of God, we are embodying it.  We are not clinging to culture and rejecting biblical truth, we are clinging to godliness and rejecting naivety and closemindedness.

Thankfully, after writing over 2000 words on the matter my blood pressure has returned to normal and maybe I can get some sleep. 😉

*I found this video while searching for stay-at-home dad blogs.  HT to athomedaddy.

I participate in a book study at Broadway UMC.  Right now we are working through a called Simply Christian by NT Wright (who happens to be one of the scholars I most look up to).

This past week the topic was supposed to be the Character of God and the story of Israel.  It surprised no one when we got a bit off subject and began talking about “souls” and what the main point of Christianity was.  When it comes to the soul I am a monist with reservations and thus don’t believe in a soul as traditionally defined — I reject the dualism of the whole proposition; I find thinking of the body as something separate from the soul leads to an unhealthy anthropology as we either see the flesh (and therefore the world) as bad or inconsequential.

That was a bombshell for some.  However it led to a good discussion on the philosophical development of the idea of the soul.  For the most part, writers in the Old Testament did not conceive of a soul.  Where the word does appear (nephish) it is referring more generally to “the self.”  Furthermore, the concept of an afterlife is virtually non-existent until the post-exilic age.  By the time of the second temple and the ministry of Jesus, the soul and the afterlife were firmly developed in Religious discussion.

So, that leads one to wonder, “What caused this change?”  Well the answer is relatively simply.  In the patriarchal (Abraham-Moses) era through the Monarchy (David, Solomon, and then all those chaps whose names you skim over when reading), the people of God saw all their needs fulfilled in YHWH in their day to day life (granted they did not always act like it).  They had YHWH’s presence with them; they had been given the promised land; and their identity was firmly established. There was no need to ask questions about what happens when you die because they saw fulfillment in their current situation.  For them, the primary question was “What does it look like to be the people of God.”  The answer to that is simple and contained in the promise to Abraham: “You will be blessed so that you can cause the blessing of all nations.”  From there, the laws and customs evolved to help flesh that out.

Things change once exile comes.  After the sins of the divided kingdoms, YHWH turns to the Assyrians and the Babylonians to be his instrument of judgment.  Simply put, Israel was not living up to their calling and the Presence, Land and Identity were stripped of them.  Before YHWH dwelt in their temple, now they were captives and YHWH presence seemed so distant.  They lamented: “By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept when we remembered Zion…  How can we sing the songs of the LORD while in a foreign land?”  Their daily lives did not exhibit the hope they once had.

Carving depicting Assyrian Exile (you can tell by the pointy hat).

At this point, hopefully you are connecting the dots.  The concept of a soul and of the afterlife developed because the people of Israel had lost their identity and primary calling.  It no longer made sense to envision God’s will being played out in their day to day lives.  Their hope instead had to lie in the “by-and-by.”

The early Jews were driven by the question: What does it mean in this day to be the people of God?  This included issues of identity, blessing and duty.  For exilic and post-exilic Jews, the question evolved: What will it mean to be the people of God?

It is interesting these questions still dominate today.  To oversimplify, liberals/emergents tend to ask the first question while evangelicals/fundementalists ask the second question.  It is easy to find ourselves in one camp or the other.  One may say, “I am better because I realize the presence of God here and now” and the other may “I am better because I care about things that eternal.”

Of course the correct answer is that both questions are valid and equally important.  We must understand what it means to be the people of God in this world, and live in eager expectation and preparation for the world that is to come.  Without doubt, the ministry of Jesus brought together these questions and he provided the ultimate answer for each in these: He lived the perfect life of reconciliation and restoration, while providing mediation and direction for the life to come.

The real power is actually not found in asking these questions side by side or together.  Rather, I am convinced we should simplify our question back to original roots:  What does it mean to be the people of God.  This question involves Identity, lifestyle (holiness) and hope.  It is rooted in an understanding that we are blessed in order to cause the blessing of all the nations.  Christians must first understand themselves as the people of God and with that identity they can begin to ask “How should the people of God live in this present world” all-the-while experiencing the hope and reassurance of the world that is to come.

There were a thousand tangents I wanted to take with this post (community vs. idividual understanding of Christianity; Hebrew parsing of Abraham’s calling; heaven, hell, sheol, souls and nephish, etc.) but for now I will be content not making my primary question revolve around my present actions or my future destination, but rather about my identity and implications it brings.

Pondering the Question

Trust me… I have no problem arguing.  Just ask my wife, my parents, or any of my friends.  I am pensive by nature and tend to think through things, so I am usually ready to defend my views.

That being said, I have learned repeatedly the futility of arguing on the internet.  I have been active in a number of forums and debated issues on facebook and blogs.  I find very rarely does it turn out well.  It seems virtual arguments tend to escalate quicker and people tend to assume the worst.  Electronic posts lack the non-verbals necessary to gauge things like sarcasm vs. sincerity or attacks vs. suggestions.  When you don’t have a larger context it is easy to stereotype and pigeon-hole.

I write this because I find myself sticking to my commitment to blog regularly (I have already posted more in the last week than I have on my various blogs over 5 years).  I am sure I will post some controversial things and I am up for discussion and encourage feedback and suggestions. However, I refuse to get into arguments over what I post.  I see blogging as a way for me to express my thoughts (and work through them) and not as an avenue for convincing others to join whatever philosophical camp I happen to be representing.

I hope to have great conversations in the coming months, but please don’t be disappointed if I refuse to respond to some comments.  It is not that I find the points invalid, or don’t appreciate a person’s thoughts.  It is just that I don’t think it is helpful for anyone to argue over the internet.  Too many words have been spilled and no many emotions raised over topics that in the end never amounted to anything.